Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

The FTC taking action against education technology provider Chegg Inc. for its lax data security practices that exposed sensitive information about millions of its customers and employees, including Social Security numbers, email addresses and passwords.

7-Eleven, Inc. and Marathon Petroleum Corporation have agreed to divest retail fuel assets used to sell gasoline and diesel fuel in 293 local markets across 20 states, to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that 7-Eleven’s acquisition of Marathon’s Speedway subsidiary violated federal antitrust laws. The complaint alleges that the acquisition will harm competition for the retail sale of fuel in 293 local markets across Arizona; California; Florida; Illinois; Indiana; Kentucky; Massachusetts; Michigan; North Carolina; New Hampshire; Nevada; New York; Ohio; Pennsylvania; Rhode Island; South Carolina; Tennessee; Utah; Virginia, and West Virginia. In addition to the divestitures, the proposed order prohibits 7-Eleven from enforcing any noncompete provisions as to any franchisees or employees working at or doing business with the divested assets. On November 10, 2021, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

The Federal Trade Commission sued 7-Eleven, Inc and its parent company, Seven & i Holdings Co., Ltd., alleging the convenience store chain violated a 2018 FTC consent order by acquiring a fuel outlet in St. Petersburg, Fla. without providing the Commission prior notice.

In 2019, following a public comment period, the FTC has approved a modified final order requiring industrial gas suppliers Praxair, Inc. and Linde AG to sell assets in nine industrial gases product markets in numerous U.S. geographic markets to four divestiture buyers. The nine product markets in which the Commission alleged harm in its October 2018 complaint are bulk liquid oxygen, bulk liquid nitrogen, bulk liquid argon, bulk liquid carbon dioxide, bulk liquid hydrogen, bulk refined helium, on-site hydrogen, on-site carbon monoxide, and excimer laser gases. In November 2022, the FTC announced the approval of a petition to modify the final order in this case.

The Federal Trade Commission authorized a lawsuit in federal court to block the proposed merger between virtual reality (VR) giant Meta and Within Unlimited, the VR studio that markets Supernatural, a leading VR fitness app. Formerly known as Facebook Inc., Meta sells the most widely used VR headset, operates a widely used VR app store, and already owns many popular VR apps, including Beat Saber, reportedly one of the best-selling VR apps of all time, which it markets for fitness use. The agency alleges that Meta’s proposed acquisition of Within would stifle competition and dampen innovation in the dynamic, rapidly growing U.S. markets for fitness and dedicated-fitness VR apps. A federal court complaint and request for preliminary relief was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to halt the transaction.

In January 2022, New York City-based Vision Path, Inc., the online seller of direct-to-consumer Hubble lenses, agreed pay penalties and redress totaling $3.5 million to settle FTC charges that it violated the Contact Lens Rule in several ways, including by failing to obtain prescriptions and to properly verify prescription information, and by substituting Hubble lenses for those actually prescribed to consumers. The FTC also alleged the company violated the FTC Act when it failed to disclose that many reviews of Hubble lenses were not by unbiased consumers but were written by reviewers who were compensated for their reviews, and, in at least one instance, by one of its own executives.

In May 2021, the FTC filed a complaint against Kushly Industries LLC and its CEO, Cody Alt, for allegedly marketing products containing cannabidiol (CBD) using unsubstantiated health and establishment claims. According to the complaint Kushly sold a variety of CBD products to the public through its website, kushly.com, and social media platforms from January 2019 to August 2020. The FTC order announced at the same time as the complaint banned the company and Alt from the alleged illegal conduct. The Commission approved the final order in July 2021. In August 2022, the FTC announced it was returning almost $21,000 to defrauded consumers.

The Federal Trade Commission is returning more than $10 million to consumers who were charged undisclosed fees by online lender LendingClub Corporation. The FTC is distributing refunds directly to more than 15,000 LendingClub customers and encouraging additional LendingClub customers to apply for refunds.

The FTC sued LendingClub in April 2018, charging that the company falsely promised loan applicants that they would receive a specific loan amount with “no hidden fees,” when in reality the company deducted hundreds or even thousands of dollars in hidden up-front fees from the loans. The FTC also alleged that LendingClub told consumers they were approved for loans when they were not and took money from consumers’ bank accounts without authorization.

The Federal Trade Commission is sending payments totaling more than $9.7 million to 61,990 consumers who were charged hidden fees by LendingClub Corporation.

These payments are the result of a claims process conducted by the FTC in February 2022. It is the second distribution of funds in this matter and brings the total amount refunded to consumers to more than $17.6 million.

The Federal Trade Commission required ARKO Corp. and its subsidiary GPM to roll back anticompetitive provisions of their acquisition of 60 Express Stop retail fuel outlets from Corrigan Oil Company last year. The complaint alleged that as originally proposed, the agreement not to compete that ARKO and GPM required Corrigan to sign as part of the acquisition harmed customers in local retail gasoline and retail diesel fuel markets throughout Michigan and Ohio. The order required them to amend a non-compete agreement they imposed on Corrigan, agree to obtain prior approval from the Commission before acquiring retail fuel assets under certain circumstances, and return to Corrigan five retail fuel outlets, among other provisions.  On Aug. 9, 2022, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

The Federal Trade Commission has required Prince International Corp. and Ferro Corp. to divest three facilities used to make porcelain enamel frit, glass enamel, and forehearth colorants, as a condition of Prince’s parent company – American Securities Partners VII, L.P. – acquiring competitor Ferro Corp. for $2.1 billion.  According to the complaint, the acquisition as proposed likely would allow the merged firm to unilaterally raise prices for porcelain enamel frit in the North American market, and for forehearth colorants in the world market. It  also would eliminate Prince as an independent competitor in the world market for glass enamel, increasing the likelihood of coordination between the merged firm and its largest competitor, Fenzi Holdings SPV S.p.A. On July 5, 2022, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

The Federal Trade Commission required Medtronic, Inc. to divest a key subsidiary of Intersect ENT, Inc. as a condition of acquiring Intersect. Under the FTC consent decree, Instersect’s Fiagon subsidiary, which makes ear, nose, and throat navigation systems and balloon sinus dilation products, will be sold to Hemostasis, LLC. According to the complaint, without this divestiture, the acquisition would pose a threat to future competition in the United States for both ENT navigation systems and balloon sinus dilation products. On June 30, 2022, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

In September 2019, the operators of a deceptive negative option scheme agreed to a court-ordered preliminary injunction temporarily barring them from a wide range of conduct.  The preliminary injunction stops the defendants from misleading consumers about supposedly “free trial” offers, enrolling them in unwanted continuity plans, billing them without their authorization, and making it nearly impossible for them to cancel or get their money back. In June 2022, the Commission announced it was returning $5.4 million to defrauded consumers.

In June 2022, the FTC took action against California-based Gravity Defyer Medical Technology Corporation and its owner Alexander Elnekaveh, filing a complaint in federal district court to permanently stop their allegedly deceptive pain-relief claims for Gravity Defyer footwear. In its complaint the FTC alleged that Elnekaveh violated a 2001 order barring him from such allegedly deceptive advertising by making scientifically unsupported claims and using misleading consumer testimonials to sell Gravity Defyer products. In February 2025, the FTC announced a final order setting the case, in which the defendants were barred from the allegedly deceptive advertising and required to pay a civil penalty of $175,000.

The FTC alleged that Twitter’s deceptive use of user email addresses and phone numbers violated the FTC Act and the 2011 Commission order.

In May 2022, the FTC took action against R360 LLC and its owner, Steven Doumar, for deceiving people seeking help for addiction about the evaluation and selection criteria for the treatment centers in their network. The case is the FTC’s first under the Opioid Addiction Recovery Fraud Prevention Act of 2018. The agency secured a $3.8 million civil penalty judgment against the defendants and an order prohibiting them from continuing to make the same kinds of misrepresentations.

The FTC along with law enforcement agencies from six states, sued Frontier Communications alleging that the company did not provide many consumers with Internet service at the speeds it promised them, and charged many of them for more expensive and higher-speed service than Frontier actually provided.

The Department of Justice filed a civil penalties complaint alleging that Lithionics Battery, LLC ("Lithionics") and Steven Tartaglia violated Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a) and violated the Made in USA Labeling Rule, 16 C.F.R. Part 323 (the “MUSA Labeling Rule”), in connection with the labeling and advertising of certain battery systems containing significant imported content as “Made in USA." The complaint further alleges that Lithionics' expressed or implied representations that its products are all or virtually all made in the United States are false or unsubstantiated.